The only complain from me is that they can reload their gunners in mid. air, idk if gaijin will do something about it, would be even cooler to have a “spare all his gunner ammo” tactic option as well as other options we have now, such as headon killing the pilot, boom-zoom and abusing bomber’s blindspots.
do we have the mine shell ingame though? which is proabaly what hit the blenheim
1 Like
I disagree. I LOVE the increased resilience for bombers. Both when I flying a bomber, AND when I am flying a fighter. I have to use my brain and make a plan before attacking a bomber now.
Does the resilience still need work, maybe a lot of work? Sure. But I’ve been having more fun with bombers and attacking bombers than I’ve had in a decade.
☝️💯
2 Likes
Also, since bomber player is basically an aerial spaa now, some tactics against spaa can work against them. But I don’t know how to actually slide or glide (when your nose is not headed towards your flying direction) to confuse the bomber player. I saw people do that to regular spaa players tho.
Attacking together from two directions definitely works as well as it does against the spaa.
My tactic rn is just sit on 6, shoot for a second and then evade bullets. Then spend some time to go back on 6 and repeat that process. With my horrible aim, I shot only three bombers this way for now.
1 Like
Mine shell is just the English translation/term for Minengeschoß.
1 Like
I also mostly see 1 bomber at the end of a match, 2 at max, so, idk if they are that resilent. But I still had fun hunting them.
What was not fun - when my airfield failed to protect me when I was landing empty because instead of real shells gaijin just made it a scripted “-50HP per second” thing that did nothing to bombers, lol. Airfields should have real AA as they do in nuclear escalation. Maybe slightly nerfed with range.
1 Like
We have several mine high-explosive shells in the game.
For example, 35 x 228mm MSD-042 HEI (DM 11 A1) is a Mine-HEI shell
(MSD = Minensprengbrandgranate, spurlos, 35mm)
Here are some x-ray scans of oerlikon tests with it and its’ predecessor MSD-020 (MSB/K)*
Last two pictures → courtesy of: https://www.small-arms-import.ch/
cutaway of MSD-042:
3 Likes
I wonder would these shells benefit from aphe-like update?
Seems like they have to have a remaining nose cone and fragments should fly in sectors instead of useless spheres.
2 Likes
I mean, their blast but especially incendiary-effects are just laughably underperforming.
I do not have fragmentation-distribution charts for MSD-042, but I do so for MSD-020 (MSB/K);
Both MSD-042 and MSD-020 use HEXAL P30 (112g for MSD-042 and 120g for MSD-020), with 30% aluminium and various firing tests have shown the same devastating result if the shells strike near, or directly on fuel-tanks, which in almost all cases (even against such with fire-supression mechanisms) the kerosene is blown up immediately and otherwise ignited.
4 Likes
I feel like in the game we have just 2mm fragments from any shell in any direction, and these fragments can’t penetrate bomber skin.
While, looking at these charts, we should have different sized fragments for different sectors. With big nose cone at the front.
gaijin, air shells rework when? Players pls don’t ruin it this time as we did with aphe…
1 Like
EDIT:
Sorry, I did not realize it was actually tested, ty for the correction.
Original Message:
̶I̶ ̶s̶t̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶w̶i̶s̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶y̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶d̶o̶ ̶a̶n̶ ̶a̶c̶t̶u̶a̶l̶ ̶t̶e̶s̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶A̶P̶H̶E̶ ̶s̶h̶e̶l̶l̶s̶, or just implement it 🙏 And, if they want to ask the playerbase for their opinion, do an in game poll/survey.
The forums should NOT be considered the final result for the entire playerbase’s opinion. For or against a proposed change. It’s not just about the statistical sample size; the “type” of player/person who takes the time to post their opinions on a forum is NOT representative of the “average” person. Not just in video games. Most people will not take the time to go out of their way to make their voices heard.
The forums are very useful and valuable, but will never be correct for judging the overall opinion of a group. Not for a video game, and not “in real life.”
However, many people, possibly even a majority of people, will take the time to click on an in game poll or survey if it is given as a popup window when they log in.
2 Likes
They did. It was on the dev server.
Gaijin was pretty clear on that, even though the majority vote was slightly in favor of no, they would allow the test to happen either way. And so they did have the test available.
Are people just forgetting this? This is how we have a majority of the clips that show the proposed APHE damage.
3 Likes
OH my bad, I thought it was never even tested. I almost never play on the dev server. Editing my post, ty.
Yeah, and this is how we have a majority of clips of “the proposed APHE damage” that were not the proposed APHE damage because the test happened only in a separate mode iirc with small amount of shells and some people complained about live-server-like shells as if they were nerfed.
Not really.
You could just go into protection analysis and you had a selection box that allowed you to tick the APHE damage changes on or off for easy comparison.
You didn’t even have to play a match.
3 Likes
Question for Dev Team, why is the Brigand not included in the new bomber damage model update? Youve made exceptions for the TIS MA, SU-8, and TU-1 for Russia. Is this just an oversight?
3 Likes
You see that B-29 tail just blow away by the MiG-19 30mm shell in the video, right?
B-29 cant meet Mig-19 smh smh random stuff, but yeah, i think most 30mm shells are weaker than they should be.
i also have this clip
I am saying that an internal explosion would indeed cause an explosion and blow off the table if the shell manages to penetrate
yeah, i like how it is right now, maybe make fires damage them faster but thats it ngl